Page 2 of 2

[ 29 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2

Co-Ord Fire
The_Real_Chris	Post subject: Co-Ord Fire Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 4:19 am
Brood Brother Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm Posts: 8139 Location: London	I'm fascinated why people see it as underpowered. I use combined assualt quite a bit and this is just as good, especially with all the disrupt weapons I can get my hands on. Something I miss to try is a lander followed by the disembarked infantry chewing into whatevers near them on sustained. All sorts of things are possible. For those that think it is underpowered what is your views on combined assualts? _________________ If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com! 'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913 "Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography." General Plumer, 191x
Top

Jaldon	Post subject: Co-Ord Fire Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 7:30 am
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 6:38 am Posts: 720 Location: Utah, pick a Pacific Island the other half of the year.	I have to agree with Chris, in execution a CF is really no different then a Combined Assault. How many Combined Assaults do you pull off on a regular basis with any other army? I admit that in my battles I only average one CF per, but sometimes will get in two, and even more rarely three. Personnaly I like to set it up so I can CF anywhere on the battlefield 'as needed' as it keeps my opponent on his toes, alone this can be an advantage. As for the activation curve, the same can be said of Combined Assaults, or retaining. In all cases the situation at the moment of the CF/Assault is the key to whether it is 'worth it' or not. For example, if my CF/Combined Assault is going to remove an unactivated enemy formation from the loop then I have lost nothing. If the same assault removes an unactivated formation from the loop and forces another enemy formation to reposition then I am ahead. The battlefield situation is what determines its effectiveness, not rules. well that's my two cents anyways............ Jaldon _________________ Brave sir Robin, when danger reared its ugly head he bravely turned his tail and fled, Brave sir Robin.
Top

Dobbsy

Post subject: Co-Ord Fire Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 8:16 am

Brood Brother Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am Posts: 4499 Location: Melbourne, Australia

Quote (CyberShadow @ 18 Jan. 2006 (11:38)) I happen to be in the camp where we think CF is a sort of red herring bonus to the tau... i.e. is a bonus with many negatives. The tactical problems are layered with CF IMHO. It may be best as a situational piece, or a party trick, and it may have various pay-offs, but this is what makes it interesting. The challenge in setting this up, and the buzz of seeing it work are one of the things about the Tau in EA. Make it too easy and it dominates, make it too tough and no-one uses. While I agree that some kind of disrupt/crossfire bonus is in character, I dont think that this is currently a necessary change to the mechanics as they are.

Given these statements I find it interesting that no one seems to see the imbalance in the Tau list vs established lists. Each established list so far generally has "heavy hitter" abilities - one or more things they do extremely well in combination with their special rules that is capable of breaking/obliterating a formation. I've put together a list of Pros and Cons

All heavy hitting things in italics...

Eldar ?
Pros - excellent assault ability with movement rate consolidation, Hit and Run, combined assault, good access to inspiring characters, Long range, strong firepower(to hit rolls), good artillery and all with double retain, good initiative and excellent blast marker removal, excellent air power, good strategy, good initiative and all-too cheap formation costs ?(given all the special abilities/capabilties vs the high number of hard formations they can muster IMO)

Cons - small formation sizes in general, average armour saves

Marines
Pros -Air Assault, excellent assault ability with TSKNF and combined assault, good access to inspiring characters, good firepower and artillery, excellent BM removal, high initiative, high strategy, excellent saves across the list

Cons - small formation sizes, short ranges, over priced formation costs:size ratio (IMO), no TKs

Orks
Pros - excellent assault abilties, Waaagh, huge numbers, combined assault, plenty of MW with long range TKs, decent-weak firepower, unrivalled large-formation air power, cheap formation costs:size ratio

Cons - average initiative, average strategy, average armour saves

Imperial Guard - excellent artillery, combined assault, large numbers of inspiring characters, long range, long range MW TK, strong firepower, reinforced armour, large numbers, good initiative, ?cheap formation costs:size ratio

Cons - low strategy, average assault

in comparison

Tau(pure form)
Pros - long range, co-ord fire
(which by the above statements isn't a game winner),
strong firepower, good air power
(but you don't win games with airpower - especially given the weak saves and small numbers/high cost of airpower vs cheap heavy AA),
marker lights, good initiative

Cons - no artillery, weak assault, average strategy, no combined assault, restricted access to inspiring characters, expensive formations costs:size ratio
(I say this because to get any decent size in a formation you pay a high price)

So, what I guess I'm trying to say here is that the Tau list (while fairly solid after 4.3.3) is still lacking a decent heavy hitter. Granted lots of shooting can break small formations, but in general I find it's all about the Assault Meta Game in Epic. If you get your forces into an assault you generally will win if you've prepped them with BMs like you should. Whereas, if you only shoot all you do is hope to destroy as many units as you can to put BMs and get a lucky break.

This is why I proposed an adjustment to CF as some other form of breaking a formation is needed if the Tau are to really trouble opposing forces (to break a formation with shooting is so much harder than assaulting) and seeing as CF uses up the all-precious activations it's no real supplement for a combined assault capability. This leaves the Tau weaker than the established lists IMO.

BTW, I'm not saying Tau can't win games - far from it - it's just more difficult to do so given the restriction they have compared to the others.